Garrett Park settles porch suit

Referendum on town zoning law set for March 2

The lawsuit against the Town of Garrett Park by residents who were denied a front porch addition has been settled out of court after more than a year of litigation and more than $152,000 spent by the town on related legal fees.

At the Town Council meeting on Monday, Mayor Chris Keller announced the settlement agreement, a decision he said came at "7:59" p.m., meaning in the final minutes before the meeting began.

Relief was palpable in the Town Hall, which has been host to months of contentious meetings with town residents who frequently took sides and launched attacks against each other in discussing the lawsuit.

The suit was brought by John and Elaine Martin after they were denied a front porch building permit in January 2008 on the grounds that their home already exceeded the minimum combined setback allowed in town code.

Keller said there are minor details to be worked out in the settlement between lawyers, but outlined the basic terms. He said the town has agreed to grant the Martins their porch building permit and will not appeal a judge's ruling on one of the counts in the lawsuit. The Martins, in turn, will drop the remaining undecided counts in the lawsuit and join the town in a motion to correct an element of the judge's January ruling, which was that the town did not have the authority to pass its minimum combined setback ordinance.

Elaine Martin said the details of the settlement will probably be made public by the end of the week. She said she was happy to be able to put it behind her.

"And I think we came to an agreement that both sides could live with," Martin said, adding that "both sides gave some things."

She said she hopes to be able to start building the porch "fairly soon" so her family can enjoy it by spring.

At the meeting, the council also decided March 2 would be the date of the referendum vote for a suspended October ordinance that changed the town law requiring a minimum combined setback of 82 percent to one requiring maximum lot coverage of 18 percent.

Several residents at the meeting objected to the March 2 date, even after the announcement of the lawsuit settlement came. The lawsuit and the referendum have been intimately linked because if a referendum vote upheld the ordinance, it would have nullified the Martins' lawsuit because Maryland zoning laws are retroactive.

Nevertheless, Councilman Charles Berry said there were "tradeoffs" between holding the referendum soon or waiting until the council election in May. He said the ordinance was "the first step" in the process of redoing the town code, which will next be examined by a special Land Use Task Force that has been set up to determine if Garrett Park's zoning rules still meet the desires of its residents.

He said he was in favor of the March 2 referendum date because it would allow the May council election to "be about other things."

"Let's get this behind us," Berry said.

Among those who wanted a delay in the referendum vote was resident Mairi Morrison, who said previous discussions about the topic have been so intractably tied to the lawsuit that she would have liked more time for residents to examine the issue without the case as a factor.

Still, she said she was "really glad it's settled."

"I think it will take away the muddiness of the referendum vote," Morrison said.

There will be one more Garrett Park Citizens Association meeting to discuss the referendum before it is held. The meeting will take place at 8 p.m., Feb. 28, at Garrett Park Town Hall, 10814 Kenilworth Ave.